Back to playbooks

Editing Checklist (Integrity Gate)

Run this before you post.

1) Evidence labeling (honesty check)

• What’s confirmed?
• What’s plausible but not confirmed?
• What’s unknown?
• If I don’t have receipts, did I write a receipts stub instead of guessing?

2) Mechanism (not a villain story)

• Did I explain how this happens (incentives, constraints, rules, money)?
• Did I avoid mind-reading motives?
• Scapegoat check: am I aiming anger at a group/person instead of the mechanism?

3) Tone (truth without cruelty)

• No contempt. No dehumanizing language.
• Would I say this in front of my kid?
• Is this written to help, not to humiliate?
• Contempt-ratio check: is any part of this written to make my audience feel superior to the other side? That’s in-group reinforcement, and every dunk confirms the story the other side has already been told about us.
• Dignity test: could someone who voted the other way read this and still find a way in - without being required to perform self-condemnation first?
• Operator vs believer: if I’m naming wrongdoing, am I aiming at the people who built and ran it, or spraying everyone who believed it? (Why this matters: We Have Work to Do)

4) State check (don’t post from the cliff)

• HALT: am I Hungry, Angry, Lonely, Tired?
• If I’m above a 6/10 emotionally, did I wait or rewrite?

5) One point

• Is this one claim / one idea?
• Did I cut the “and another thing…” paragraph?

6) One ask (measurable)

• Did I include one doable action (1 minute / 10 minutes / 1 week)?
• Is the ask specific (who, what, when)?
• Does the ask name a decider or a time-boxed action?

7) Thread risk

• Is this likely to create more heat than light?
• If yes, did I add a boundary line (or choose not to engage in comments)?

8) Misread check

• What is the most likely bad-faith interpretation?
• Did I remove the easiest ammo without blurring the point?

Back to playbooks